Representing genetic variation as continuous surfaces: An approach for identifying spatial dependency in landscape genetic studies

112 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Effects of sample size, number of markers, and allelic richness on the detection of spatial genetic pattern (2012, background): “…some attention, much less is known about the effects of the study design in terms of the number of sampled individuals, number of loci analysed per individual (but see Murphy et al. 2008), and number of alleles per locus on the ability to correctly and reliably identify the generating process.”
Landscape genetics: where are we now? (2010, methodology): “Individual-based methods consider individual genotypes in estimations of genetic connectivity (e.g. Manel et al. 2007; Murphy et al. 2008), as opposed to clustering methods that calculate genetic distance among demes, such as FST or Nei’s Dn.”
A case for incorporating phylogeography and landscape genetics into species distribution modelling approaches to improve climate adaptation and conservation planning (2010, methodology): “LCP is somewhat limited in its ability to accurately model gene flow in real populations (McRae & Beier, 2007; Murphy et al., 2008), rather gene flow is likely to occur via numerous direct pathways through the landscape and using indirect stepping”